> The reason I chose to make Danish Names a paid app from the beginning was simply that I think it's a lot more honest and upfront to charge a small one-time fee before the download, as opposed to claiming your app is free and then charging a high fee or even a subscription inside the app. There's an honesty and straight-forwardness to paid apps that I like: You pay once, and then you don't get bothered with requests for paid upgrades when you're using the app.
I understand what you are going for here but I have no qualms with "Free, with IAP" as long as when I look at the IAP I see things like:
- Unlock Full Version
- Remove Ads
- 1 Month/1 Year (for certain types of apps where that makes sense)
- Lifetime Unlock
and not:
- 100 Gems
- Pack of Coins
- Subscription for an app that I only plan to use a handful of times
Since Apple doesn't offer trials I have no issue with a dev offering some limited free download with IAP to unlock. The limits need to match the app in some way, like a limit on total queries or a timer.
Subscriptions have to be either something that has recurring costs to the developer (like they depend on a 3rd party API that charges for access) or the dev is upfront that it's an optional opportunity to support them. I'm also fine with some nice-to-have features locked behind a paywall if they are not core to the app functionality.
Apple does not offer trials for paid upfront apps but they do offer trials for subscriptions.
Also I’ve seen developers do things like X searches for free (either one time or per month/week/day) then you have to subscribe or pay a one-time unlock fee.
CallSheet (an IMDB replacement) does this and it’s nice to be able to try out the app a few times before you decide if it’s worth the $12/yr or whatever it costs.
>The reason I chose to make Danish Names a paid app from the beginning was simply that I think it's a lot more honest and upfront to charge a small one-time fee before the download, as opposed to claiming your app is free and then charging a high fee or even a subscription inside the app. There's an honesty and straight-forwardness to paid apps that I like: You pay once, and then you don't get bothered with requests for paid upgrades when you're using the app.
The resonated with me. I'm trying to get my own app from 80% to 95% so I can release and ill be going the upfront cost route for these say reasons.
Frankly, I'm surprised that you got four downloads!
I'm not saying your app is bad, I'm sure it's perfectly fine and does what it purports to do. The UI looks nice. I just find it incredibly difficult to believe that any sort of market exists for the product you've produced: people who are expecting a child, and want that child to have a Danish name, and are unwilling to Google search (or ask ChatGPT etc) for eg "Danish boy names" AND are willing to pay $4.99 (mostly) sight unseen for a premium experience with baffling features ("Names you have favorited can easily be shared with your loved ones directly from the app"? Surely I could just, like... tell them the name?)
The conclusion you seemed to reach ("no one is buying paid apps") doesn't make a lot of sense. Plenty of people are buying paid apps. What you have discovered is that the Dutch Lifestyle section of the app store gets very little traffic and that an extraordinarily niche app can rank with a user base you can count on one hand.
Why are you against a free trial then pay-to-unlock option for your app? That's a lot more transparent and honest than a model where you have to pay up front without knowing what you are going to get.
Well, in this case the screenshots show you exactly what the app provides. Having said that, in the future I'll probably go for an in-app purchase model like you suggested, given how few people download paid apps.
I have mostly found that all app store apps, no matter what app store, are 100% garbage unless they come from a Fortune 500 company and even then, a lot of those are garbage.
It seems like if you’re big enough, you’re obligated to be on an app store, and incidentally your software quality is only going to be on par because you’re large enough to afford designers who actually adhere to design guidelines, maybe.
I will never forget how Schiller wanted the App Store to be a Nordstrom experience but instead it always feels like a dollar store. Because the quality of the apps are bottom-tier, there’s overwhelming amounts of Chinese knockoffs, and the apps, if paid, are literally sometimes at dollar store prices.
The app stores are ghetto. Don’t publish there. It’s mere coincidence that large companies like Spotify are there. And they’re not there because the app stores are good.
MobileSheets(1) gets an endorsement from me, if that counts for something.
It's imo the best app for managing sheet music for performances. I sing in 4 choirs, and its a godsend so that I don't need to juggle a bunch of binders.
Is it the nicest looking? No. Does it have some jank? Sure. Could the UX be improved? Definitely. But it works where it matters, it's a one off payment and the dev is actually responsive for support queries.
Yeah, this would be a great opportunity. I think most of the time when you search for anything on app stores, the results are mostly filled with apps that can’t follow design guidelines, have annoying IAP that should have just been you paying for the app, etc.
It’s abundantly clear that Apple has to allow a lot of slop in to collect their rent.
Google Play just straight up isn’t worth browsing.
The Microsoft Store is maybe worse or on par because their audience doesn’t seem to care about user experiences all together.
> I have mostly found that all app store apps, no matter what app store, are 100% garbage unless they come from a Fortune 500 company and even then, a lot of those are garbage.
Hard disagree. My favorite apps are made by either a solo developer or a small group/company.
So you have seven examples out of nearly 2 million apps, one doesn't exist anymore, one is a wrapper around news.ycombinator.com, and one is the equivalent of a skin app.
You said all apps are garbage unless they come from Fortune 500 companies, I give you examples of apps that are not garbage from solo developers, and you respond with this… I have no clue what to say.
I’m not sure HN is the place for you with that attitude.
Why are you being so rude? You claimed that apps not made by fortune 500 companies are all garbage, they listed some counter examples (not an exhaustive list), and that isn’t good enough? If anyone here is ruining the site, I think it might be you. I had been enjoying reading the comments here until seeing yours.
(Also Octal is one of my favorite apps, even if you think it is nothing but a wrapper around news.ycombinator.com.)
Why can’t you people read? Do you not know what the word mostly means? I don’t enjoy reading your comment either. You’re not contributing anything. Talk about the topic or move on.
His examples are really bad. That’s a matter of opinion. Get over it.
I chat with a successful app dev one time long ago. His formula is rather simple. If it takes time to develop the app don't do it. In stead publish 10-20 apps in a day. Hire some people on the cheap to search and organize data. Even after a long time his idea what might be successful and what probably wont be is way off.
Ideas are like, an app that is just a list of some kind. Ill make up an example: An app that has searchable list of cities in Denmark with a typical picture for each. Here you could allow the user to write a note with each entry or allow sorting by distance from- but it is more effective to move on to the next "app". You make 20 country apps like that, non of them get any downloads except from one country that gets 10 per month/120 per year. That makes it a productive day.
Totally. If you want to opt-in to selling beside knockoffs, then sure go for it. But this duopoly requirement of being forced to sell your software in a digital dollar store is gross.
> The reason I chose to make Danish Names a paid app from the beginning was simply that I think it's a lot more honest and upfront to charge a small one-time fee before the download, as opposed to claiming your app is free and then charging a high fee or even a subscription inside the app. There's an honesty and straight-forwardness to paid apps that I like: You pay once, and then you don't get bothered with requests for paid upgrades when you're using the app.
I understand what you are going for here but I have no qualms with "Free, with IAP" as long as when I look at the IAP I see things like:
- Unlock Full Version
- Remove Ads
- 1 Month/1 Year (for certain types of apps where that makes sense)
- Lifetime Unlock
and not:
- 100 Gems
- Pack of Coins
- Subscription for an app that I only plan to use a handful of times
Since Apple doesn't offer trials I have no issue with a dev offering some limited free download with IAP to unlock. The limits need to match the app in some way, like a limit on total queries or a timer.
Subscriptions have to be either something that has recurring costs to the developer (like they depend on a 3rd party API that charges for access) or the dev is upfront that it's an optional opportunity to support them. I'm also fine with some nice-to-have features locked behind a paywall if they are not core to the app functionality.
Apple does not offer trials for paid upfront apps but they do offer trials for subscriptions.
Also I’ve seen developers do things like X searches for free (either one time or per month/week/day) then you have to subscribe or pay a one-time unlock fee.
CallSheet (an IMDB replacement) does this and it’s nice to be able to try out the app a few times before you decide if it’s worth the $12/yr or whatever it costs.
>The reason I chose to make Danish Names a paid app from the beginning was simply that I think it's a lot more honest and upfront to charge a small one-time fee before the download, as opposed to claiming your app is free and then charging a high fee or even a subscription inside the app. There's an honesty and straight-forwardness to paid apps that I like: You pay once, and then you don't get bothered with requests for paid upgrades when you're using the app.
The resonated with me. I'm trying to get my own app from 80% to 95% so I can release and ill be going the upfront cost route for these say reasons.
Based on the numbers I've seen and the comments I've read here, I'd go for in-app purchases instead. Good luck with your app!
Frankly, I'm surprised that you got four downloads!
I'm not saying your app is bad, I'm sure it's perfectly fine and does what it purports to do. The UI looks nice. I just find it incredibly difficult to believe that any sort of market exists for the product you've produced: people who are expecting a child, and want that child to have a Danish name, and are unwilling to Google search (or ask ChatGPT etc) for eg "Danish boy names" AND are willing to pay $4.99 (mostly) sight unseen for a premium experience with baffling features ("Names you have favorited can easily be shared with your loved ones directly from the app"? Surely I could just, like... tell them the name?)
The conclusion you seemed to reach ("no one is buying paid apps") doesn't make a lot of sense. Plenty of people are buying paid apps. What you have discovered is that the Dutch Lifestyle section of the app store gets very little traffic and that an extraordinarily niche app can rank with a user base you can count on one hand.
Why are you against a free trial then pay-to-unlock option for your app? That's a lot more transparent and honest than a model where you have to pay up front without knowing what you are going to get.
Well, in this case the screenshots show you exactly what the app provides. Having said that, in the future I'll probably go for an in-app purchase model like you suggested, given how few people download paid apps.
I have mostly found that all app store apps, no matter what app store, are 100% garbage unless they come from a Fortune 500 company and even then, a lot of those are garbage.
It seems like if you’re big enough, you’re obligated to be on an app store, and incidentally your software quality is only going to be on par because you’re large enough to afford designers who actually adhere to design guidelines, maybe.
I will never forget how Schiller wanted the App Store to be a Nordstrom experience but instead it always feels like a dollar store. Because the quality of the apps are bottom-tier, there’s overwhelming amounts of Chinese knockoffs, and the apps, if paid, are literally sometimes at dollar store prices.
The app stores are ghetto. Don’t publish there. It’s mere coincidence that large companies like Spotify are there. And they’re not there because the app stores are good.
I have to say I don't recognize that experience at all. There are plenty of good apps - both from large companies and solo developers.
Please do shamelessly promote the solos here.
MobileSheets(1) gets an endorsement from me, if that counts for something.
It's imo the best app for managing sheet music for performances. I sing in 4 choirs, and its a godsend so that I don't need to juggle a bunch of binders.
Is it the nicest looking? No. Does it have some jank? Sure. Could the UX be improved? Definitely. But it works where it matters, it's a one off payment and the dev is actually responsive for support queries.
https://zubersoft.com/mobilesheets/
Yeah, this would be a great opportunity. I think most of the time when you search for anything on app stores, the results are mostly filled with apps that can’t follow design guidelines, have annoying IAP that should have just been you paying for the app, etc.
It’s abundantly clear that Apple has to allow a lot of slop in to collect their rent.
Google Play just straight up isn’t worth browsing.
The Microsoft Store is maybe worse or on par because their audience doesn’t seem to care about user experiences all together.
> I have mostly found that all app store apps, no matter what app store, are 100% garbage unless they come from a Fortune 500 company and even then, a lot of those are garbage.
Hard disagree. My favorite apps are made by either a solo developer or a small group/company.
Some examples:
- Overcast (Podcast Player)
- Prologue (Audiobook App)
- Octal (HN Client)
- Apollo (RIP, Reddit)
- Drafts (Notes app)
- Any Zach Gage game
- Widgetsmith (Widgets)
So you have seven examples out of nearly 2 million apps, one doesn't exist anymore, one is a wrapper around news.ycombinator.com, and one is the equivalent of a skin app.
No, these are not shining examples of good apps.
You said all apps are garbage unless they come from Fortune 500 companies, I give you examples of apps that are not garbage from solo developers, and you respond with this… I have no clue what to say.
I’m not sure HN is the place for you with that attitude.
[flagged]
Why are you being so rude? You claimed that apps not made by fortune 500 companies are all garbage, they listed some counter examples (not an exhaustive list), and that isn’t good enough? If anyone here is ruining the site, I think it might be you. I had been enjoying reading the comments here until seeing yours.
(Also Octal is one of my favorite apps, even if you think it is nothing but a wrapper around news.ycombinator.com.)
Why can’t you people read? Do you not know what the word mostly means? I don’t enjoy reading your comment either. You’re not contributing anything. Talk about the topic or move on.
His examples are really bad. That’s a matter of opinion. Get over it.
+1 for Prologue. I use it every day and I think its amazingly stable and well designed
I chat with a successful app dev one time long ago. His formula is rather simple. If it takes time to develop the app don't do it. In stead publish 10-20 apps in a day. Hire some people on the cheap to search and organize data. Even after a long time his idea what might be successful and what probably wont be is way off.
Ideas are like, an app that is just a list of some kind. Ill make up an example: An app that has searchable list of cities in Denmark with a typical picture for each. Here you could allow the user to write a note with each entry or allow sorting by distance from- but it is more effective to move on to the next "app". You make 20 country apps like that, non of them get any downloads except from one country that gets 10 per month/120 per year. That makes it a productive day.
Investing serious effort into something that has to go through the review process is just irresponsible IMO.
App stores are a business thing not a technical thing. You must be a business partner with the OS vendor to publish in one.
They're a horrible idea and quite frankly should be illegal.
Totally. If you want to opt-in to selling beside knockoffs, then sure go for it. But this duopoly requirement of being forced to sell your software in a digital dollar store is gross.